In a Pakistani school, a student with a disability — a wheelchair user, a child with a hearing difficulty, a student with autism or a learning disability — faces a risk that other students do not. Research internationally, and the experience of Pakistani special educators, point the same way: students with disabilities are bullied more often, the bullying lasts longer, and it is less likely to be reported or believed. The reasons are painful but plain: difference attracts attention, communication difficulties make reporting harder, and adults sometimes mistake bullying for "just how children treat someone different". A generic anti-bullying policy does not close this gap. Schools need a targeted plan, built around the specific risks these students face, and this bullying students disabilities school protection guide sets it out.
The plan has four parts: understanding why the risk is higher, buddy systems that genuinely protect, staff vigilance at the points of the day where risk concentrates, and classroom practices that build real inclusion rather than mere presence. It fits within the school's wider inclusion work, as described in our guide to inclusive education in Pakistan, and within its child protection policy — because protecting a vulnerable student is a safeguarding duty, not an optional kindness.
Why the Risk Is Higher — and Often Hidden
Several factors stack up against students with disabilities. Social isolation is the biggest: a student who struggles to join games, follow fast conversation, or read social cues is more likely to be alone at break, and alone is where bullying happens. Communication barriers compound this — a student with a speech difficulty may not be able to explain what happened clearly, a student with autism may not recognise teasing as bullying until it escalates, and a student who uses assistive communication may have no vocabulary in their device for reporting. Physical differences and visible aids (a wheelchair, a hearing aid, a white cane) can become targets for mockery or damage. And in some Pakistani school cultures, disability still carries stigma that adults have not fully challenged, which makes bystanders less likely to intervene and teachers slower to recognise what they are seeing.
The bullying is also harder to detect. It may be social rather than physical — systematic exclusion from games and groups, which leaves no bruise and no witness willing to speak. It may happen in the "helping" relationship itself, where a supposed helper teases or controls the student they assist. And it may be under-reported because the student fears losing the little social contact they have, or because previous reports were dismissed as misunderstandings. Schools must therefore not rely on reports from the student alone: they must actively look, through observation, through trusted adults checking in regularly, and through asking the student directly, in a way they can answer, whether they feel safe and included.
Buddy Systems That Actually Protect
A buddy system pairs a student with a disability with one or two trained classmates who walk with them between classes, sit with them at lunch, include them in games, and notice if something is wrong. Done well, it is the single most effective protection a school can offer, because it removes the isolation that bullying feeds on. Done badly, it becomes charity that embarrasses the student and breeds resentment in the buddy. The difference lies in design: buddies should be volunteers, trained briefly (how to communicate with their partner, what to do if they see bullying, how to include without taking over), and rotated termly so no single relationship becomes a burden. The partnership should be framed as friendship and shared activity — a games partner, a project partner — not as a duty or a favour.
Two rules protect the dignity of the arrangement. First, the student with a disability chooses, as far as possible, who their buddies are and what the buddy does — a student who wants help at break but not in class should have that respected. Second, buddies are recognised and thanked, but never rewarded for "being kind to the disabled child" in a way that frames the partner as an object of pity; recognition should be for leadership and friendship, the same language used for prefects and monitors. Schools already running peer mentoring programmes can adapt that structure, but buddying needs its own training, because the communication and inclusion skills involved are specific. Check in with both sides monthly: is the partnership working, is it still wanted, does anything need to change?
The Inclusion Test
Staff Vigilance Points Through the Day
Risk concentrates at specific points of the day, and staff vigilance should concentrate there too. Transitions — between classes, to and from the playground, at the start and end of the day — are the highest-risk moments, because supervision is thin and students with mobility or sensory difficulties move more slowly or with less awareness of their surroundings. Breaks need structured inclusion, not just supervision: a teacher who organises a game that includes everyone does more than a teacher who watches from the side. School vans need a named monitor or a seating plan that protects younger or more vulnerable students, and the van journey should be part of the school's safeguarding conversations with parents. Washrooms and changing areas need the same privacy-respecting attention as for all students, with entry-area monitoring and a clear route for a student to get help quickly.
Staff also need training to recognise bullying of students with disabilities specifically. Teasing about a disability, mimicking a student's speech or movement, hiding or damaging assistive equipment, and deliberately excluding a student from a group activity are all bullying, even when the students involved describe them as jokes. Teachers should be briefed on each student's communication needs — how the student reports, what signs of distress look like for that student, and who their trusted adult is — and this briefing should be updated when staff change. A simple one-page profile, kept confidentially with the class teacher and the safeguarding lead, prevents the common failure where a new teacher does not know that a quiet student is quiet because they cannot speak up, not because nothing is wrong.
Inclusive Classroom Practices That Prevent Bullying
The classroom itself is prevention. When a teacher regularly uses group work that mixes students, assigns roles that play to different strengths, and teaches the class — matter-of-factly, without singling anyone out — about different ways of learning and communicating, difference becomes ordinary rather than remarkable. Specific practices help: seating plans that place a student with a disability among friends rather than at the edge of the room; classroom jobs rotated to everyone, including students with disabilities, so they hold visible, valued roles; and explicit teaching about respectful language around disability, in Islamiat or ethics lessons where the school's values are discussed. Our guide to identifying learning disabilities helps teachers understand the needs behind the behaviour they see.
Parents of students with disabilities are essential partners, and the school should work with them, not around them. Agree a communication routine — a weekly message or a notebook — so parents hear about small problems before they become big ones, and so the school hears about problems at home or on the journey. Involve parents in planning: they know their child's communication, triggers, and strengths better than any file. And protect the student's voice: where a student can express preferences, those preferences should shape the plan. A student who says "I don't want a buddy at lunch, I want to sit with my friends" is telling the school something important, and a plan that ignores it will fail no matter how well-intentioned.
When Bullying Happens: A Faster, Fairer Response
When bullying of a student with a disability is confirmed, the response should be faster and more thorough than the standard process, because the harm is typically greater and the student's ability to recover unaided is lower. Inform parents the same day, offer additional support (counselling, a trusted adult check-in, a temporary buddy change), and apply consequences under the discipline policy without minimising the incident as a joke or misunderstanding. Document carefully: what happened, what the student said (in their own communication mode), what action was taken, and what follow-up is scheduled. Where a student's disability affects their account, take the time to listen properly — through their communication aid, a trusted interpreter, or a familiar adult — rather than concluding that an unclear account means nothing happened.
Review the case at the level of the system, not just the individuals: was there a supervision gap, a seating problem, a buddy failure, a training gap? Fix the system gap, not only the incident. And follow up for longer than the standard four weeks if needed, because recovery for a student who already faces daily barriers takes longer. The measure of success is not a punishment delivered but a student who feels safe, included, and able to come to school without dread. When a school achieves that for its most vulnerable students, it has achieved it for everyone — because a school culture that protects its most vulnerable members is a culture in which bullying struggles to take root at all.
AI Help: Muse AI
Muse AI is Meta's personal AI assistant, available in the Muse app. A teacher can ask it to suggest inclusive classroom activities, or to draft a simple, respectful briefing note about a student's communication needs for new staff. Join Muse with invite code LTGSWD — in the Muse app, go to Settings > Redeem token and enter the code.
Disclosure: LTGSWD is the author's Muse invite code.